Community mailing list archives


Intermediate Costing in MRP

XOE Corp. SAS, David Arnold
- 31/12/2016 09:33:13

If you don't agree, please veto and correct me.

I opinion that there is one functionality missing in Odoo which would pave the way for intermediate (& elegant) cost controlling.

Given that we accept and acknowledge  well known center concepts, the lack of a simple possibility to encode cost allocation from different auxiliary cost centers to their final bearers is astonishing. As far as I know, it even has been dropped while some hardly usable implementation existed in prior versions! Germans call this allocation sheet BAB or Betriebsabrechnungsbogen and it's such a commonplace concept, that I pretty much doubt that it would be less common place amongst controllers (not accountants!) around the world. The possibilities of the new interface, see ex. Timesheets, should open the possibilities to solve this attribution definition in a UX optimized manner.

While I guess a PR to upstream should be sincerely discussable with responsible persons at Odoo HQ, I also noticed a second flaw in the activity based costing approach of the new MRP application:

While general ledger is affected correctly (!) on every consumption activity, be it material or cost of an activity, the analytical entries (here used as auxiliary entries to be able to identify and manually cross the general ledger difference on the production account caused by the valuation increase on it's credit side due to activity costs) are only affected at the time of finishing the production.

While valid for the stable use case, it provides inconsistencies in the unstable use case where work centers do not obey a constant cost structure (think of agricultural work centers such as a harvesting squadron). In the case of changing work center cost structure it can produce the inconvenient situation, where costs are correctly accounted for on the general ledger while analytic entries are produced based on the cost registered at time of termination of the production, not the activity.

I guess this is a flaw or even a functional bug in the system and it seems it hasn't been accounted for yet.

Any opinions? Someone Wang's to join a PR effort to upstream?

Some time ago, seasoned implementers recommended phantom products, but given the principle that cost controlling is not general leader's business and given the new activity based approach through analytical accounts, this recommendation has become less valid.